campaignsfandomcom-20200223-history
Talk:Hillary Clinton
(moved this comment from main article) If you are afraid of the truly socialist platform Hillary Clinton espouses (HillaryCare etc) please help me in raising money to start my new website dedicated to informing the public that despite her recently moderated stances, which are nothing more than the same tactic displayed by her husband Bill in the 2006 election, a vote for Hillary Clinton is a vote for higher taxes, a vote for socialized medicine, a vote against personal liberty, a vote for unions that are chasing away jobs from our shores in the truly global labor market, a vote against free trade, a vote to increase the size of the federal government, a vote to absolve her of her alleged wrong doings while a partner in the Rose Law Firm. If you have any information or money to donate to the cause please contact me at ryanu@hotmail.com. All donations will go 100% to startup and maintenance of web related marketing activities centered around our new website which will be hosted @ http://downhillary.org. Thanks for your time. Ryan Underdown ::The above argument is unfair and largely inaccurate. First, using the term "socialist" as you use it connotes Communism. The fact is, as soon as this nation passed the New Deal legislation and began programs such as social security, welfare, medicare, etc., it became socialist in nature. You calling Hillary a socialist is more of a ploy to scare people by using extreme lables. As far as your claims about Hillary ruining our nation with taxes and big government, maybe you haven't watched the news in the past 6 years, but the deficit is enormous and promises to cause serious economic problems in the years to come; maybe we could use slightly higher taxes and more restrictive spending to cut the deficit and avert an economic disaster. Talking about cutting spending brings me to the point of big government; it is pretty much universally accepted that the old labels of big government democrats and minimal gov. republicans is outdated. One reason the deficit has increased is because of so many new government programs under Bush. News flash: the government has grown more under Bush than the previous Clinton admin. Talking about new gov. programs brings us to your next point: social liberty. While you claim that social liberty will be limited under Hillary, you forget all of the gross government intrusions into personal privacy under the Neo-Con Bush administration. Go ahead and vote for the far right and then enjoy your phonecalls being traced. Now, that being said, I agree with you on some points; I agree that she is deliberately (and rather obviously) moving to the center to increase her chances in the general election, I acknowlege that your claim about socialized medicine is founded in the fact that she created a socialized medicine plan as first lady, and I agree with you in that I'm not going to vote for her. ( I am voting Democrat, just not her.) Hillary Care Government sponsored medicine is about as socialist as you can get. I am not in any way endorsing President Bush's policies. As for the Clinton - Bush argument. We are now in a period of protracted war against Islamofascism. During President Clinton's term as president the congress was dominated by the Republican party as you might recall. Congress sends a budget up to the president to sign. Bill Clinton did not have much choice in the matter. However this is not a Democrat vs Republican issue to me. Hillary Clinton's disingenuousness with the public and her overarching Socialist ideals are the issue. *You throw around words like socialism, etc. However, is it really such a bad thing to have a bit of socialism to moderate our free-market driven economy. I think that universal health care would be better for actual people. And I'm no big fan of Hillary. Goshzilla 11:44, 5 January 2007 (UTC) article format While the above comment isn't really what I'd like to see hear, I don't think that it is the best use of resources to only put objective information about Hilary Clinton on this page, as we already have that in the form of wikipedia. Rather, I've been advocating the use of dynamic essays, which would put forth the basic arguments for or against (or other) in a way that would consolidate everyone's views. So while personal campaigns (as the one above) shouldn't be tolerated (though put that link at the bottom of the page, for sure!), the opinions held within the campaign should be captured in the essay against Clinton. I'll submitt, though, that the above is one of the more radical arguments against her, and should be addressed as such. :: I moved it originally, I agree with your view. Feel free to adjust... wasn't sure how to best change it, but didn't think that personal appeal was appropriate so moved it here for now. Can we link some issues this candidate has spoken about here? I'm helping maintain the education section of our wiki, and I think it might be helpful to have a few issues she's commented on as they relate to education. Bmackenty 19:30, 12 September 2006 (UTC)